BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

9 results for “reassessment”+ Section 292Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi108Mumbai106Bangalore101Jaipur38Chennai27Pune26Chandigarh21Raipur14Kolkata13Nagpur12Surat9Ahmedabad9Indore7Rajkot6Jodhpur6Patna5Hyderabad4Dehradun4Panaji3Visakhapatnam2Cochin2Cuttack2Guwahati2Lucknow2Agra2Jabalpur1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 14824Section 14413Section 14710Section 143(2)8Section 2506Section 148A6Section 271A6Section 69A5Addition to Income5Penalty

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT vs. ANILKUMAR OCHHAVLAL DESAI, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 292/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Jurisdictional Assessing Officer?

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 159Section 250Section 68

section 292B, and continued with the reassessment. The court held that the petitioner's communication about the death of the assessee

KUSHAL VINODKUMAR BHATT LEGAL HEIR OF LATE SHRI VINODKUMAR RAMANLAL BHATT,ANAND vs. THE ACIT (OSD), WARD-5, ANAND

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

4
Reassessment3
Cash Deposit2
ITA 752/AHD/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jun 2025AY 2011-12
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 159(2)(b)

reassessment proceedings are legally unsustainable. Thus, the provisions of Section 292B does not cure a jurisdictional defect, and provisions of Section

DEEP SUDHIRBHAI SHETH (LEGAL HEIR OF SUDHIR HIMMATLAL SHETH),AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD 3(2)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1706/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V. Mahadeokarasstt. Year: 2016-17 Deep Sudhirbhai Sheth (Legal Heirs Ito, Ward-3(2)(1) Of Sudhir Himmatlal Sheth) Vs. Ahmedabad. Prop. Subhlaxmi Jewellers 3, Khodiyar Shopping Centre Nr.Ishanpur Bus Stand Ishanpur, Ahmedabad. Pan : Ainps 3786 Q (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri Nitin Vishnu Kulkarnai, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/11/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Nitin Vishnu Kulkarnai, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148

reassessment cannot be initiated against a dead person and that section 159 mandates issuance of notice to the legal representative alone. It is further settled that section 292B

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2)(1), AHMEDABAD , AHMEDABAD vs. LATE KHODAJI RANCHHODJI THAKOR LEGAL HEIR NARENDAKUMAR KHODAJI THAKOR, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is, therefore, dismissed

ITA 948/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.948/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 The Ito Late Khodaji Ranchhodji Ward-4(2)(1) बनाम/ Thakor V/S. Ahmedabad – 380 015 Legal Heir Narendrakumar Khodaji Thakor Ahmedabad – 382 481 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Afwpt 1453 K (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/11/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Siddhartha Nautiyal, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Dated 24/02/2025 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-2018. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 250

292B or section 292BB of the Act. The Court held that participation or lack of objection by the assessee does not confer jurisdiction upon the Assessing Officer when the very foundation of the proceedings is fundamentally defective. The ratio of this judgment applies with equal force to cases where assessment proceedings are initiated in the name of a deceased person

INFINITY INTERNATIONAL,AHMEDABAD vs. NFAC, DELHI PRESENT JURIS. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 462/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

section 292B of the Act. 21. We are, therefore, of the considered opinion that in the present case, the notice u/s.148 dated 02.04.2022 having no signature affixed on it, digitally or manually, the same is invalid and would not vest the Assessing Officer with any further jurisdiction to proceed to reassess

INFINITY INTERNATIONAL,AHMEDABAD vs. NFAC, DELHI PRESENT JURIS. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 517/AHD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

section 292B of the Act. 21. We are, therefore, of the considered opinion that in the present case, the notice u/s.148 dated 02.04.2022 having no signature affixed on it, digitally or manually, the same is invalid and would not vest the Assessing Officer with any further jurisdiction to proceed to reassess

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WD.4(2)(1),, AHEMDABAD vs. LATE KHODAJI RANCHHODJI THAKOR LEGAL HEIR NARENDAKUMAR KHODAJI THAKOR, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is, therefore, dismissed

ITA 941/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं /Ita No. 941/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2016-2017

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT. DR
Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 292B

292B or section 292BB of the Act. The Court held that participation or lack of objection by the assessee does not confer jurisdiction upon the Assessing Officer when the very foundation of the proceedings is fundamentally defective. The ratio of this judgment applies with equal force to cases where assessment proceedings are initiated in the name of a deceased person

VIKAS VIJAY GUPTA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT, AHMEDABAD-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby\ndismissed

ITA 404/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar, Vice President\nAnd Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member\nITA No. 404/Ahd/2024\nAssessment Year 2017-18\nVikas Vijay Gupta\nPrincipal Commissioner\n604 Sarap,\nof Income Tax,\nOpp. Navjivan Press Vs Ahmedabad-1,\nP.O. Navjivan,\nAhmedabad\nAhmedabad-380014,\nGujarat\n(Respondent)\nPAN: AEOPG6723L\n(Appellant)\nAssessee Represented: Shri Jaimin Shah, A.R.\nRevenue Represented: Shri R. N. Dsouza, CIT-DR\nDate of hearing : 27-02-2025\nDate of pronouncement : 27-05-2025\nआदे

Section 115BSection 147Section 263Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274Section 69A

292B\nof the Act and thereafter Ld. PCIT invoked revision proceeding and\nissued Show Cause Notice dated 20-01-2024.\n6. 3. As per section 263 of the Act, the PCIT when found the\nassessment order is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of\nRevenue, after offerding opportunity of hearing to the assessee,\npass revision order to enhance or modify

MADHAV INFRA PROJECTS LTD (ERSTWHILE AASHKA CONSTRUCTIONS P. LTD.),VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

ITA 88/AHD/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalिनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 Vs. Madhav Infra Projects Ltd., Dcit, (Erstwhile Aashka Circle-1(1)(1), Constructions Pvt. Ltd.), Ahmedabad 4, Madhav House, Nr. Panchratna Building, Subhanpura, Baroda, Gujarat Pan : Aadcm 1157 C अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate, Ms. Urvashi Shodhan, Ar & Shri Parin Shah, Ar Revenue By : Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19.03.2024/26.06.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28.06.2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Annapurna Gupta: Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-12, Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)" For Short] Dated 23.12.2022 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short] For Assessment Year (Ay) 2009-10. 2. Grounds Raised Are As Under :- “1. Ld. Cit (A) Erred In Law & On Facts Confirming Action Of Ao Passing An Ex- Parte Order On An Entity That Ceased To Exist Pursuant To Order Of Amalgamation Passed By Hon'Ble High Court. The Order Passed On Non-Entity Is A Nullity & Void Ab Initio That Ought To Be Quashed.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 250Section 271(1)(c)

reassessment proceedings being initiated in 2016 by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act on 30- 03-2016, on account of information in the possession of the AO that the assessee had booked contrived losses on share transactions by resorting to Client Code Modification done in collusion with its broker M/s Amrapali Finance & Capital Services Ltd. The fact of assessment